VASUNDHARA VIHAR CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 1 (5), KATIHAR

ITA 111/PAT/2025Status: DisposedITAT Patna28 November 2025AY 2014-153 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the appeal before the NFAC was dismissed in limine without condoning the delay of 190 days. The Tribunal, after hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials, found the reasons for the delay to be genuine and bonafide. Therefore, the Tribunal condoned the delay. The Tribunal restored the appeal to the file of the NFAC with a direction to decide the same on merits after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The ratio decidendi is that if the delay in filing an appeal before the first appellate authority is for bonafide and genuine reasons, and the revenue does not object, the appellate tribunal should condone the delay and remand the matter for a decision on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Vasundhara Vihar Construction Private Limited, filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Patna Bench, against an order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 23.04.2024, for the Assessment Year 2014-15. The ITAT noted that the assessee's appeal before the NFAC was barred by limitation by 190 days. The assessee's counsel explained the delay as bonafide and genuine. The Assessing Officer (AO) did not raise any objection to condoning the delay. The ITAT, finding the reasons for delay to be genuine, condoned it and proceeded to adjudicate the appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal before the ITAT is barred by limitation, and if so, whether the delay should be condoned. The assessee argued that the delay of 190 days in filing the appeal before the NFAC was due to bonafide and genuine reasons, and the NFAC's dismissal of the appeal in limine without condoning the delay violated principles of natural justice and fair play. The assessee requested a one-time opportunity of hearing before the NFAC by restoring the issue to its file. The revenue did not object to this request. The ITAT had to decide whether to condone the delay and restore the matter to the NFAC for a decision on merits.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “PATNA” BENCH, PATNA

Before: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VP & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM

For Appellant: Shri K.M Mishra, AR

For Respondent: Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, DR

Hearing: 26.11.2025Pronounced: 28.11.2025

This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 23.04.2024 for the AY 2014-15.

At the outset, we note that the appeal of the assessee is barred by limitation by 250 days. At the time of hearing the counsel of the assessee explained the reasons for delay in filing the appeal. The Ld. D.R did not raise any objection in condoning the delay. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the delay is for bonafide and genuine reasons and hence, we condone the delay and adjudicate the appeal.

3.1. The learned DR on the other hand did not object for the same.

3.2. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the order has been passed by dismissing the appeal in Limine without condoning the delay of 190 days. As we found the reasons to be genuine and bona fide and therefore, condoning the same, we restore the appeal to the file of the Learned CIT (A) with a direction to decide the same on merit, after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 28.11.2025.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →